The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ), Kolkata bench has held that the provisions relating to tax deduction at the source ( TDS ) cannot be invoked in case of payment made for translation of articles from English to Bengali.
The assessee, an individual, and a famous Oncologist filed income tax returns declaring a total income of Rs. 2,12,41,280/-. While completing the revisionary assessment proceedings, the officer noted that the assessee had paid an amount of Rs. 96,000/- to Mahua Basu Mallick for Cancel Awareness Programme without deduction of tax at source under section 194J of the Act. He, therefore, disallowed the same under section 40a(ia) of the Income Tax Act.
On appeal, the assessee pleaded that this payment of translation charges does not fall under the ambit of professional fees within the meaning of section 194J of the Act and accordingly no disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act is warranted.
The Tribunal noted that the assessee has made payment of Rs. 96,000/- to Mahua Basu Mallick for displaying articles towards Cancel Awareness Programme in the Bengali language pursuant to dictations given by the assessee in English. In effect, this is nothing but a payment made for translation of articles from English to Bengali.
“This, in our considered opinion, does not require any professional skill, so as to fall within the ken of provisions of section 194J of the Act. Hence in our considered opinion, the provisions of 194J of the Act are not attracted in the facts of the instant case with regard to the subject mentioned payment of Rs. 96,000/-. We also find that the assessee had produced the entire bills, vouchers, bank statements, books of accounts, details of professional fees before the ld. AO which was duly examined by the ld. AO and which fact is also mentioned at page 2 of the assessment order. While this is so, it cannot be said that the ld.AO had not made any inquiry regarding this issue while framing the assessment. On the contrary, it can only be said that the ld. AO had taken a possible view on the matter and the Ld. CIT is only trying to substitute his own view against the view taken already by the ld. AO, by invoking the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, which in our considered opinion, is not permissible as per law. This issue is now well settled by the various High Courts and does not leave any ambiguity. Accordingly, we have no hesitation in quashing the revision proceedings initiated u/s 263 of the Act by the Ld. CIT,” the Tribunal said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
